Dismissed

Fishermen Cooperative Society, Miryalaguda v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC18 Oct 2023WP/22164/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Petition challenging fishing proceedings for violating Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21, and seeking direction to permit fishing. Counsel submitted the cause of action does not survive; the High Court dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was dismissed without costs and all pending miscellaneous applications stand closed.

Fishermen Cooperative Society… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[^320e ]

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR^{THE STATE OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH^{DAY OF OCTOBER} TWO THOUSAND AND^{TWENTY THREE}

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE DR.^{JUSTICECHILLAKUR SUMALATHA}

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO :22164^{OF 2018}

¶8

Between:

¶9

Fishermen CooPerative^SocietY, Miryalaguda, RePt., bY^its President K.Srinivas, S/o. Hanumaiah,^Age 55'^years, R/o^Miryalaguda town and Mandal, Nalgonda.

¶10

...PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

1 The State of Telangana,^{Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Fisheries} Department, Secretariat,^Hyderabad.

¶13

2 The Commissioner^{of Fisherres-Cum-Registrar, Ir/iryalaguda Town, Nalgonda} District.

¶14

2 The District Collector,^{Nalgonda District at Nalgonda'}

¶15

4 The District Fisheries^{Officer, Nalgonda District at Nalgonda'}

¶16

5 The Fisheries Development^{officer,Thumbadam mandal, Nalgonda District at} Nalgonda.

¶17

...RESPONDENTS

¶18

Petition under Article^{226 of the constitution of lndia prayingthat in the} circumstances stated in^{the affidavit filedtherewith, the High court may be} pleased to issue order or For the^{reasons stated in the accompanyingaffidavit. it} is hereby direction more^{particularlyin the natureof writ of Mandamus to declare} the action of Respondent^{Nos. 2 and 4 in issuing proceedingsdated 21-06-2018} vide Memo No.^{224tE212018 without decidingthe modification applicationand} Revision filed by the^{Petitioner/societyon 18-06-2018 as illegal,arbitrary} violation of principles of^{naturaljustice and violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g)and} 21 of the constitution^{of lndia and violation of orders dated05-06-2018passed} by this Hon'ble court^{in w.A. No. 723 of 2O18 and vlolation of the provisions of} Telangana Co-operative^{SocietiesAct, 2015 and set.aside the same and}

¶19

consequently direct the Respondents to permit the Petitioner/Society to catch fish in Yadgarpally Pedda Chervu, l,4iryalguda Appalamma Chervu, Chinthapally Chouta Chervu and Mangapadu Nalla Chervu as per the rates fixed by the General Body by extending the time from 30- 06-2018 till harvesting the fish.

¶20

lA NO: 1 OF 2018

¶21

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 to dispose of the modification application and Revision filed by the Petitioner/Society on 18-06-2018.

¶22

lA NO: 2 OF 2018

¶23

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to Suspend the operation of proceedings dated 21-06-2018 vide Memo No.2241E212018 issued by the Respondent No. 2.

¶24

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI P. S. P. SURESH KUMAR

¶25

Counsel forthe Respondents: MS. P. SUMALATHA, ASSISTANT GP FOR FISHERIES

¶26

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶27

HOI{BLE DT. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶28

WRIT PETITION No.22164 OF 2018

¶29

ORDER:

¶30

This Writ Petition is filed seeking the Court to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 4 in issuing procecdings dated 21.6.2018, vidc Memo No.224/tr212018, u,ithout deciding the modification application and Revision filed b_v the petitioner/ society on 18.6.2018 as ilicgal and arbitrary ar-rd to set aside the same and consequently, to dircct the respondents to permit the petitioner/ society to catch fish in Yadgarpall;r Pedda Chervu, Miryalguda Appalamma Chen.u, Chinthapally Chouta Chervu and Mangapadu Nalla Chervu.

¶31

Sri P.S.P.Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the cause of action as of no'*. docs not survlve.

¶32

Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is

¶33

dismissed. No order as to costs.

¶34

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶35

l SD/. K.SREERAMA^MIETHY ASSISTANT^REGIFTRAR ./ //TRUE COPY/i SECTION%FFICER

¶36

To, 1 . one cc^{to Srip.S. p.} ,suresh^{Kumar.Advocateto"u?","nnuna,} at Hyderabad i. iil 66;'i"^{GP ioi Fisheries, Hishcourtfor the stateo'} tourl 3 Two CD^Copies

TJ GJP 6

HIGH COURT

DATED:1811012023

ORDER

*rr: STAI6 orl
(
?
;li
0 7 t{o\J 2[8
)
"i:.i/
i'

¶43